BASUDEB ROY Vs. NATIONAL FERTILIZER LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appears for the petitioner. However considering that the writ petition is of the year 1999 and the petitioner has been enjoying an interim order, it is not deemed expedient to await the petitioner any further and with the help of the counsel for the respondent the records have been perused. This petition was filed claiming that the petitioner, belonging to the Scheduled Caste, had been working with the respondent since December, 1994 as an Accounts Clerk, in the Office of the respondent earlier situated at Community Centre, East of Kailash, New Delhi and subsequently at Noida; that though the respondent has a regular post of Accounts Clerk at various offices and is obliged to make appointment to the said post on regular basis, but to escape its legal liability to pay proper pay scale and benefits to the employees was engaging them through contract labour in violation of the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970; that the petitioner also, was in December, 1994 employed through a contractor M/s Gopal Singh in the office of the respondent at Vijaypur (Guna), Madhya Pradesh, Unit and such appointment through the contractor continued till September, 1997; however since the contractor was not paying proper salary, the petitioner left the said contractor's appointment; that upon learning that the Central Marketing Office of the respondent at New Delhi had vacancy for Accounts Clerk, the petitioner applied but the respondent instead of considering and appointing him on regular post appointed him on casual basis as Accounts Clerk at the Central Marketing Office at East of Kailash, New Delhi on 21st October, 1997 at a monthly salary of Rs. 1,800/ -; however no appointment letter was issued; that the petitioner thereafter was working directly under the respondent as Accounts Clerk at a monthly salary of Rs. 1,800/ -; however neither his attendance was marked nor was he given any other benefits; that though there were vacant posts of Accounts Clerk since 1997 but no regular appointment thereto was being made. This writ petition was filed in or about April, 1999 averring that the respondent was likely to fill the vacancies on the post of Accounts Clerk and consequently likely to terminate the services of the petitioner and seeking the relief of regularization of his services in appropriate pay scale and seeking further directions to the respondent to pay arrears of proper salary and other benefits to the petitioner since December, 1994.

(2.) NOTICE of the petition was issued on 30th April, 1999 and vide ex parte order of that date the respondent was restrained from terminating the services of the petitioner till further orders. The said interim order was continued from time to time and was made absolute on 18th October, 2000 when Rule was issued in the petition.

(3.) THE petitioner filed rejoinder to the aforesaid counter affidavit.